Abstract:Background: Persistent moderate or severe unipolar depression is common and expensive to treat. Clinical guidelines recommend combined pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy. Such treatments can take up to 1 year to show an effect, but no trials of suitable duration have been done. We investigated the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of outpatient-based, specialist depression services (SDS) versus treatment as usual (TAU) on depression symptoms and function. Methods: We did a multicentre, single-blind, patient-level, parallel, randomised controlled trial (RCT), as part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) study, in three mental health outpatient settings in England. Eligible participants were in secondary care, were older than 18 years, had unipolar depression (with a current major depressive episode, a 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HDRS17] score of ≥16, and a Global Assessment of Function [GAF] score of ≤60), and had not responded to 6 months or more of treatment for depression. Randomisation was stratified by site with allocation conveyed to a trial administrator, with research assessors masked to outcome. Patients were randomised (1:1) using a computer-generated pseudo-random code with random permuted blocks of varying sizes of two, four, or six to either SDS (collaborative care approach between psychiatrists and cognitive behavioural therapists for 12 months, followed by graduated transfer of care up to 15 months) or to the TAU group. Intention-to-treat primary outcome measures were changes in HDRS17 and GAF scores between baseline and 6, 12, and 18 months' follow-up. We will separately publish follow-up outcomes for months 24 and 36. Clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness were examined from health and social care persp ectives at 18 months, as recommended by the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01047124) and the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN10963342); the trial has ended. Findings: 307 patients were assessed for eligibility between Dec 21, 2009, and Oct 31, 2012. 94 patients were assigned to TAU and 93 patients to SDS, and were included in intention-to-treat analyses. The changes from baseline to 6 months in HDRS17 and GAF scores did not significantly differ between treatment groups (mean change difference in HDRS17 score -1·01 [95% CI -3·30 to 1·28], p=0·385; and in GAF score 1·33 [-2·92 to 5·57], p=0·538). Primary outcome data were available for 134 (72%) patients at 12 months. We noted no differences at 12 months' follow-up between SDS and TAU for mean HDRS17 score (14·8 [SD 7·9] in the SDS group vs 17·2 [7·3] in the TAU group, p=0·056) or GAF score (60·4 [11·7] vs 55·8 [12·7], p=0·064), and the changes from baseline to 12 months in HDRS17 and GAF scores did not significantly differ between treatment groups (mean change difference in HDRS17 score -2·45 [95% CI -5·04 to 0·14], p=0·064; and in GAF score 4·12 [-0·11 to 8·35], p=0·056). The mean change in HDRS17 score from baseline to 18 months was significantly improved in the SDS group compared with the TAU group (13·6 [SD 8·8] in the SDS group vs 16·1 [6·6] in the TAU group; mean change difference -2·96 [95% CI -5·33 to -0·59], p=0·015), but the GAF scores showed no significant differences between the groups (61·2 [SD 13·0] vs 57·7 [11·9]; mean change difference 3·82 [-9·3 to 8·57], p=0·113). We reported no deaths, but one (1%) patient was admitted to hospital for myocardial infarction, and three episodes of self-harm were reported in three (2%) patients (two receiving TAU, one receiving SDS care). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of SDS versus TAU was £43 603 per quality-adjusted life-year. Interpretation: Compared with usual specialist mental health secondary care, SDS might improve depression symptoms for patients with persistent moderate to severe depression, but functional outcomes and economic benefits are equivocal. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care, UK Medical Research Council, Nottinghamshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Derbyshire Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridgeshire and Peterborough NHS Foundation Trust, University of Nottingham.

How effective is a web-based mental health intervention (“deprexis”) if started at psychiatric routine inpatient treatment of major depressive disorder? A pragmatic parallel-group randomized controlled trial

Online Self-Help as an Add-On to Inpatient Psychotherapy: Efficacy of a New Blended Treatment Approach

A randomized controlled trial of internet-based therapy in depression

Effectiveness of an add-on brief group behavioral activation treatment for depression in psychiatric care: a randomized clinical trial

Efficacy of a Guided Web-Based Self-Management Intervention for Depression or Dysthymia: Randomized Controlled Trial With a 12-Month Follow-Up Using an Active Control Condition

Patient engagement programs for recognition and initial treatment of depression in primary care: a randomized trial

A pragmatic randomized waitlist-controlled effectiveness and cost-effectiveness trial of digital interventions for depression and anxiety

Preventing Depression in Adults With Subthreshold Depression: Health-Economic Evaluation Alongside a Pragmatic Randomized Controlled Trial of a Web-Based Intervention

Comparing Online and On-Site Cognitive Behavior Therapy in Major Depressive Disorder: Protocol for a Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial

Preliminary clinical and cost effectiveness of augmented depression therapy versus cognitive behavioural therapy for the treatment of anhedonic depression (ADepT): a single-centre, open-label, parallel-group, pilot, randomised, controlled trial

Evaluation of the online-based self-help programme "Selfapy" in patients with unipolar depression: study protocol for a randomized, blinded parallel group dismantling study

Follow-Up Treatment After Inpatient Therapy of Patients With Unipolar Depression—Compliance With the Guidelines?

Depression in primary care: interpersonal counseling vs selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. The DEPICS Study. A multicenter randomized controlled trial. Rationale and design

Efficacy of Three Low-Intensity, Internet-Based Psychological Interventions for the Treatment of Depression in Primary Care: Randomized Controlled Trial (Preprint)

Internet-delivered psychological treatment as an add-on to treatment as usual for common mental disorders: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized trials

Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a specialist depression service versus usual specialist mental health care to manage persistent depression: a randomised controlled trial

Effectiveness of a brief psychological mindfulness-based intervention for the treatment of depression in primary care: study protocol for a randomized controlled clinical trial

Evaluation of the internet-based intervention “Selfapy” in participants with unipolar depression and the impact on quality of life: a randomized, parallel group study

The long shadow of early-change patterns: a 3-year follow-up after the use of a web-based intervention for mild to moderate depressive symptoms

Efficacy of Three Low-Intensity, Internet-Based Psychological Interventions for the Treatment of Depression in Primary Care: Randomized Controlled Trial

The Appalachia Mind Health Initiative (AMHI): A pragmatic clinical trial of adjunctive internet-based Cognitive Behavior Therapy for treating major depressive disorder among primary care patients